Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 101

Thread: chiefs done before season starts?

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    454

    Default chiefs done before season starts?

    The quarterback swears he'll be playing somewhere else come September and the defensive end isn't letting a pending suspension stop him from complaining he is underpaid.
    When the head coach isn't angrily scolding the media, he's insisting he is an honest man no matter what the disgruntled quarterback might imply.
    As far as general manager Carl Peterson is concerned, just about everybody seems unhappy with him, especially media critics who blast away on a daily basis. But it's not true that he's fled the country. He's only in Scotland for the birth of a grandchild.
    The month of May has been anything but merry for the Kansas City Chiefs. If the normally short, laid-back practices of the spring are this tumultuous, what chaos and controversy must loom in the autumn?
    "This is the offseason. Are you kidding me?" coach Herm Edwards exclaimed this week while parrying with reporters.
    "We will have a starting football team when we go to Houston (for the Sept. 9 season opener). They'll be the best 46 guys in my opinion who can help us win games. Period."
    But if only it were that simple. For many reasons beyond his control, Edwards is finding the sledding rough as he goes about retooling one of the NFL's oldest lineups and patching up quarrels between players and the front office.
    The biggest irritant, for both the quarterback and the coach, is the presence of Trent Green.
    Soon to turn 37, the two-time Pro Bowler figures he's not in the long-range plans for a team which Edwards has said needs to get younger.
    So he and his agent worked a deal with Miami after, Green says, Peterson assured him the club would make a trade if he found a team that wanted him.
    But Peterson and the Dolphins have been unable to agree on compensation, leading to the absurd situation of having a quarterback taking practice snaps this week with what will probably soon be ex-teammates.
    "It's very strange," Green says. "I don't even know my role."
    What's infuriated Edwards have been implications he has not been truthful when he said Green would be given a fair chance to win the starting job.
    "If a situation changes down the road, that doesn't mean that I didn't tell the truth," he snapped at reporters after one practice. "The one thing I do is tell the truth. Maybe some people can't accept that. If the situation changes, don't get it twisted like, `He said this and now it's this.'"
    Edwards was so angry at one local radio sports talk host, he led him away from the group and got in his face, gesturing forcefully as the startled young man backed away.
    But if Green is upset with Peterson for not pulling the trigger on the Miami trade, Jared Allen is absolutely furious with the sometimes-confrontational general manager. In a move that could only be termed a public relations disaster, Allen went public last winter with his demands to be traded shortly after he was arrested for a second DUI.
    Predictably, he's been suspended for the first four games of this coming season and Peterson has refused to yield to his contract demands.
    But after having dinner and a heart-to-heart talk one night in Las Vegas with Edwards, Allen signed a one-year tender and reported this week. He's slimmed down, in good condition and promising to make no waves.
    But he's also angry at Peterson.
    "I don't have anything to prove to the Chiefs. I'm going to go out and play the same way I've been playing for the last three years, and that will take care of itself," he said.
    "My teammates and Herm. That's why I'm here," he said. "This is one of my favorite coaching staffs I've ever played for."
    Amid this backdrop, contract negotiations are also heating up between Peterson and the agent for Pro Bowl running back Larry Johnson. Nobody is predicting a smooth ride.
    But to Pro Bowl guard Brian Waters, all the behind-the-scenes maneuvers are just a part of "the shrewdness of this organization."
    "They've always been very shrewd business types," he said. "I don't think they've ever gone out and taken many risks on players. They always stay tight to their business plan."
    So does that bother the players?
    "It bothers you when it's your time to get paid."


    :sign0136:
    :character00112:

  2. #41
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TXChief View Post
    It seems like more teams have won the super bowl with a balanced team. The only teams I can think of that won with high powered off or great def is the rams and ravens.
    Am I the only one who watched the Super Bowl, last season?Lol. Or how about the Steelers, the year before?(Granted, the Steelers started to become more balanced, but still, a defensive monster.)If you can create a monster, on one side of the ball, then bring the other side to a high level, This is where you will find a Super Bowl team.
    Last edited by chief31; 06-17-2007 at 04:15 PM.

  3. #42
    Member Since
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Read the name dumbass!!
    Posts
    13,363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    Am I the only one who watched the Super Bowl, last season?Lol. Or how about the Steelers, the year before?(Granted, the Steelers started to become more balanced, but still, a defensive monster.)If you can create a monster, on one side of the ball, then bring the other side to a high level, This is where you will find a Super Bowl team.
    Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.

  4. #43
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canada's #1 Chiefs Fan View Post
    Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.
    Ageed. New England seems to be the model, for everyone, as a balanced team. Well, fact is, they have a borderline monster, on both sides of the ball. A very rare luxury.

  5. #44
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    31,643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    Am I the only one who watched the Super Bowl, last season?Lol. Or how about the Steelers, the year before?(Granted, the Steelers started to become more balanced, but still, a defensive monster.)If you can create a monster, on one side of the ball, then bring the other side to a high level, This is where you will find a Super Bowl team.
    I think you have just described a balanced team.

    Hey, don't look now but you just made our case; thanks BTW!
    Last edited by Chiefster; 06-17-2007 at 10:42 PM.

  6. #45
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    31,643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canada's #1 Chiefs Fan View Post
    Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.

    Exactly!

  7. #46
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canada's #1 Chiefs Fan View Post
    Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.
    In the Steelers' case, they continued to be a "defense-first" team, in the postseason. The Colts had one game, that made the defense look good and that was more a case of the Chiefs' offense playing poorly. The Ravens had a weak offense, anyway. Much like the Bears. While the Patriots threw thirty-something, on the board. Both of those teams were carried by their dominant side of the ball. But your point is weel taken. Both sides of the ball need to perform at their best, to have a real chance, at a Super Bowl victory.

  8. #47
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    31,643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    In the Steelers' case, they continued to be a "defense-first" team, in the postseason. The Colts had one game, that made the defense look good and that was more a case of the Chiefs' offense playing poorly. The Ravens had a weak offense, anyway. Much like the Bears. While the Patriots threw thirty-something, on the board. Both of those teams were carried by their dominant side of the ball. But your point is weel taken. Both sides of the ball need to perform at their best, to have a real chance, at a Super Bowl victory.

    Yup; the offense and the defense have got to do their jobs.

  9. #48
    Member Since
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Read the name dumbass!!
    Posts
    13,363

    Default

    Holy Crap man...we all agree on something. Guess this thread is gonna get closed now. lol

  10. #49
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canada's #1 Chiefs Fan View Post
    Holy Crap man...we all agree on something. Guess this thread is gonna get closed now. lol
    Hunh-uunh!!!!

  11. #50
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,152

    Default

    You're aaaaa doo-doo head.Doo-doo heeead, doo-doo head!!!

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •